Re: [RFC PATCH 28/30] Improved symbolic error names

[Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2022-08-30 at 14:49 -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> From: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> This patch adds per-error-site error codes, with error strings that
> include their file and line number.
> 
> To use, change code that returns an error, e.g.
>     return -ENOMEM;
> to
>     return -ERR(ENOMEM);
> 
> Then, errname() will return a string that includes the file and line
> number of the ERR() call, for example
>     printk("Got error %s!\n", errname(err));
> will result in
>     Got error ENOMEM at foo.c:1234

Why? Something wrong with just using %pe ?

        printk("Got error %pe at %s:%d!\n", ERR_PTR(err), __FILE__, __LINE__);

Likely __FILE__ and __LINE__ aren't particularly useful.

And using ERR would add rather a lot of bloat as each codetag_error_code
struct would be unique.

+#define ERR(_err)                                                      \
+({                                                                     \
+       static struct codetag_error_code                                \
+       __used                                                          \
+       __section("error_code_tags")                                    \
+       __aligned(8) e = {                                              \
+               .str    = #_err " at " __FILE__ ":" __stringify(__LINE__),\
+               .err    = _err,                                         \
+       };                                                              \
+                                                                       \
+       e.err;                                                          \
+})